Notified the House that Mr Speaker has not selected amendment (a) in the name of Wendy Chamberlain and called Stuart C. McDonald to move the motion.

Edward Leigh questions whether splitting up the UK is a better solution than dealing with current issues related to EU nationals' rights and statuses.

Steve Double counters Stuart McDonald's claims by citing an email from a constituent who successfully applied after missing the deadline, suggesting that the scheme works well.

Chris Stephens mentions concerns about physical proof of status for mortgage and banking purposes, echoing calls for clarity on this issue.

Craig Williams criticises Stuart McDonald's approach as scaremongering and points out the successful applications and settled statuses granted under the scheme.

Alex Sobel expresses concern about the status of children born to EU nationals in the UK, highlighting uncertainties surrounding their citizenship status.

Thomas Tugendhat criticises the assumption that leaving a larger union is harder than leaving the EU, questioning the logic of those who advocate for Scottish independence while highlighting complexities involved.

Jonathan Edwards raises issues around shortages in HGV drivers and suggests allowing regional governments to address skills gaps through shortage occupation lists would alleviate economic problems.

Pays tribute to the success of the EU settlement scheme, emphasises the scale of applications received and processed, notes that millions of applications have been completed with over 5.1 million grants issued, highlights the work done by dedicated staff and organisations, discusses late applications and provides details on reasonable grounds for such delays.

Questions the Minister about the number of applications that have fallen through the net, inquires about legal guarantees and public awareness regarding the EUSS, discusses issues related to looked-after children and their eligibility for British citizenship.

I pay tribute to the organisations assisting EU nationals in the settlement scheme. The debate should not be conducted on the narrative set by the Government’s hostile environment on immigration; rather, it should acknowledge the positive contributions of EU nationals to the UK. I highlight examples such as Emma Raducanu and football players who are children or grandchildren of immigrants. However, many EU citizens feel unwelcome due to the settlement scheme, leading them into legal uncertainty. Our society and NHS would not function without migrants' hard work; therefore, the immigration system needs to be fixed by addressing issues like workforce shortages in key sectors such as healthcare, construction, agriculture, food industries, and hospitality. We must also address how UK citizens abroad are being treated compared to EU nationals in the UK. The Home Office has many questions to answer regarding those who missed the deadline for settled status applications and how they will be supported moving forward.

Welcomed the tone of the debate but expressed concern about language and tone towards EU citizens. Emphasised the scale of achieving over 6 million applications, highlighting the importance of clarity during political uncertainty. Acknowledged the Government's efforts in ensuring people feel welcome to apply. Welcomed the Minister's proportional response to late applications. Stressed that the UK's settlement scheme for EU citizens is among the most generous and urged Members to focus on welcoming tone rather than causing division.

Reiterated the importance of a welcoming tone towards EU citizens. Noted that 5.4 million applications had been settled as of the last check, which is a significant achievement considering the uncertainty over Brexit. Emphasised the need for proportionality in dealing with late applicants and commended the Government's generous settlement scheme compared to other EU countries. Criticised SNP for attempting to create division by proposing a border between Scotland and the rest of the UK.

The speaker criticises the UK Government’s handling of the EU Settlement Scheme, citing numerous delays and uncertainties that cause considerable stress to her constituents. She mentions specific cases where individuals have faced significant hardships due to bureaucratic issues and lack of clarity in immigration processes. She also raises concerns over digital inclusivity and cross-Government system readiness for seamless verification of an individual's status.

I am delighted to speak on the subject of the EU settlement scheme, as it provides us with a great opportunity to reflect on the invaluable contributions that our friends and neighbours from the EU bring to our country and local communities. Many of my constituents are doctors, nurses, paramedics, carers, teachers, and staff working for parliamentary services, who all contribute to building a fairer, greener, and healthier country. The settlement scheme has seen 6 million applications with 5.4 million positive outcomes, and the Government’s £8 million investment in advertising and £22 million investment in supporting vulnerable applicants illustrate our commitment not to leave anyone behind.

I find it bizarre that the Scottish National party has chosen to use its valuable Opposition day slot to debate the EU settlement scheme. The truth is that the vast majority of British people wanted to end freedom of movement, and the fact that 6 million EU citizens have gone through the process reflects the success of the scheme. It is disingenuous of the SNP to level any accusations against the Government for making the process difficult or arcane as it has worked incredibly well. The SNP's fantasy to further isolate Scotland with a separate immigration system is impracticable and harmful, especially when it comes to protecting Scots' rights to access the rest of the UK.

Whitford shared her personal experience with Brexit's impact on her husband who is a German doctor working in the NHS. She noted the sharp decline in EU nurses due to negative language used during Brexit negotiations and emphasised practical issues such as application refusals and difficulties faced by vulnerable groups like the elderly, children in care, women, and those with caring responsibilities.

Double celebrated the success of the EU settled status scheme, noting that almost 6 million EU citizens have applied for it. He praised the simplicity of the process and thanked the Home Office for its efforts to ensure wide awareness and successful implementation.

Jardine acknowledged the concerns raised by EU citizens regarding their future status, noting worries about Windrush-type scandals and costs associated with obtaining citizenship. She emphasised that despite these issues, many people feel unwelcome in a country they consider home and where they have contributed significantly.

The decision to leave the EU was made through a referendum, and the UK Government worked diligently on the EU settlement scheme, which processed over 6 million applications. The Home Office engaged with local employers, set up an assisted digital service for those without appropriate skills or confidence, provided grant funding to support vulnerable citizens, and ensured that late applicants still had the opportunity to apply due to valid reasons such as being in abusive relationships.

Critiques the EU settlement scheme for causing unnecessary anxiety and trauma for individuals, highlighting a personal story of Irena Jendrycha, a 77-year-old holocaust survivor who was forced to relive her past horrors during the application process. Law argues that the Government's hostile environment policy is morally reprehensible and questions how they can call this scheme a success.

Defends the EU settlement scheme, stating it has been successful with over 6 million people applying. He emphasises that the Government provided extensive support including advertising, online resources, and funding to assist organisations in helping applicants. Challenges the SNP's approach towards immigration and questions why fewer immigrants have chosen to settle in Scotland compared to other parts of the UK.

The EU settlement scheme is criticised for underestimating the number of EU citizens in the UK and creating a hostile environment. The speaker highlights issues such as glitches on the app, inaccessible paper forms, unresponsive helpline services, and fear among applicants due to potential repercussions if the deadline is missed. She requests updates from the Minister regarding assurance for those unable to apply through no fault of their own.

The speaker emphasises that East Renfrewshire's population, including EU nationals who served on the frontline during the pandemic, is facing serious issues due to the Government's approach. She criticises the UK Government for not providing reassurance and highlights concerns over potential mistreatment similar to what happened with the Windrush generation. The speaker also calls for an immigration system that works for Scotland’s society.

Supports the motion as a microcosm of diverging societies in UK and EU post-Brexit. Argues for immigration to be seen positively in Scotland due to historical context and current economic benefits from EU workers. Criticises the hostile environment caused by the new immigration settlement scheme, causing disruption in various sectors including agriculture, hospitality and HGV sector. Emphasises the need for devolved powers over immigration policy similar to those in Quebec or the Isle of Man.

Highlights the lack of discussion on EU nationals' rights post-Brexit, contrasting with debates about free movement of goods. Discusses the uncertainty created by Brexit and its impact on employment opportunities for EU citizens in Northern Ireland. Criticises the devolution of a 'hostile environment' to community services due to the current immigration frameworks. Calls for legal clarification regarding access to services and addressing service standards and data protection issues. Emphasises the negative economic impacts, especially in sectors like agrifood, manufacturing, tourism, hospitality, health, and social care.

EU citizens who moved to the UK have been treated appallingly, and many find themselves in legal limbo. The government must provide physical proof of status for those with pre-settled status as 89% are unhappy about the lack of it. Research from the Residential Landlords Association shows that 20% of landlords are less likely to consider letting their property to EU or EEA nationals due to digital-only status issues, highlighting discrimination and uncertainty in daily life.

More than 6 million applications have been processed but many questions remain for those who missed the deadline. Late applicants due to domestic abuse should be considered with reasonable grounds for late application, yet clarity is needed on what constitutes acceptable evidence. The Home Office must also ensure flexibility in considering mental health issues as a reasonable ground.

The SNP MP criticises the necessity of the debate, expressing gratitude to her colleague and an advocacy group for their work on this issue. She highlights the casework burden in her office related to the EU settlement scheme delays and lack of clear guidelines for late applications. McLaughlin questions whether individuals with mental health issues or those in coercive relationships qualify for late application exemptions. Concerned about economic impacts, particularly in agriculture and hospitality sectors due to a decline in EU nationals working in Scotland, she calls on the Government to listen to industry leaders like Tim Martin of Wetherspoons and the National Farmers Union. She argues against the requirement for physical evidence as proof of residency, advocating instead for an automatic declaratory system similar to what other European countries offer UK citizens. McLaughlin emphasises that promises made by Home Secretary and Prime Minister regarding EU citizens' right to stay in the UK were broken, urging Government Members to support Scotland's independence referendum.

Responded to the debate by expressing support for EU citizens who have contributed to UK, disagreed with claims that Scotland and England's views on immigration diverge, emphasised Home Office caseworkers' priority is to grant status, reassured those awaiting decisions about their rights enshrined in law until a decision is made. Mentioned £21.5 million awarded by the Home Office for support services for vulnerable groups, including adults and children in care settings. Reiterated the Government's view that the settlement scheme prevents another Windrush-type situation from happening and ensures secure digital evidence of immigration status.